Cited by 115

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Accounting for biological aggregation in heating and imaging of magnetic nanoparticles

Etheridge, Michael L., Hurley, Katie R., Zhang, Jinjin, Jeon, Seongho, Ring, Hattie L., Hogan, Christopher, Haynes, Christy L., Garwood, Michael, Bischof, John C.·2014·TECHNOLOGY

Abstract

Aggregation is a known consequence of nanoparticle use in biology and medicine; however, nanoparticle characterization is typically performed under the pretext of well-dispersed, aqueous conditions. Here, we systematically characterize the effects of aggregation on the alternating magnetic field induced heating and magnetic resonance (MR) imaging performance of iron oxide nanoparticles (IONPs) in non-ideal biological systems. Specifically, the behavior of IONP aggregates composed of ~ 10 nm primary particles, but with aggregate hydrodynamic sizes ranging from 50 nm to 700 nm, was characterized in phosphate buffered saline and fetal bovine serum suspensions, as well as in gels and cells. We demonstrate up to a 50% reduction in heating, linked to the extent of aggregation. To quantify aggregate morphology, we used a combination of hydrodynamic radii distribution, intrinsic viscosity, and electron microscopy measurements to describe the aggregates as quasifractal entities with fractal dimensions in the 1.8–2.0 range. Importantly, we are able to correlate the observed decrease in magnetic field induced heating with a corresponding decrease in longitudinal relaxation rate (R 1) in MR imaging, irrespective of the extent of aggregation. Finally, we show in vivo proof-of-principle use of this powerful new imaging method, providing a critical tool for predicting heating in clinical cancer hyperthermia.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1142/s2339547814500198

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 1 references

Research works printed but not linked: 56

  1. 10.1038/74464 · DOI
  2. 10.1007/s00775-004-0560-1 · DOI
  3. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2004.10.012 · DOI
  4. 10.1016/j.addr.2008.03.018 · DOI
  5. M. L. Etheridge, A. Jordan and J. C. Bischof, Phys. Therm. Ther 17 (CRC Press, 2012) pp. 1–25.
  6. 10.1016/j.addr.2009.03.009 · DOI · Paper page
  7. 10.1016/j.jmr.2006.05.014 · DOI
  8. 10.1002/mrm.22378 · DOI
  9. 10.1002/mrm.24831 · DOI
  10. 10.1002/mrm.25181 · DOI
  11. 10.1016/S0304-8853(96)00070-4 · DOI
  12. 10.1103/PhysRevB.63.024410 · DOI
  13. 10.1016/j.jmmm.2005.01.072 · DOI
  14. 10.1016/j.jmmm.2005.01.070 · DOI
  15. 10.1016/j.mri.2008.01.039 · DOI
  16. 10.1088/0957-4484/20/39/395103 · DOI
  17. 10.1088/0022-3727/43/47/474010 · DOI
  18. 10.1063/1.3488881 · DOI
  19. 10.1021/jp1118234 · DOI
  20. Dutz S., 2012, J. Nano- Electron. Phys., 4, 02010
  21. 10.1103/PhysRevB.85.045435 · DOI
  22. 10.1038/srep01652 · DOI
  23. 10.1007/s10439-012-0633-1 · DOI · Paper page
  24. 10.1006/jcis.2000.7027 · DOI
  25. 10.1364/AO.30.004859 · DOI
  26. 10.1016/S0021-8502(99)00026-9 · DOI
  27. Friedlander S. K., 2000, Smoke, Dust, and Haze: Fundamentals of Aerosol Dynamics
  28. 10.3109/02656739309061478 · DOI
  29. 10.1109/20.718537 · DOI
  30. 10.1016/S0304-8853(02)00706-0 · DOI
  31. 10.1088/0957-4484/21/1/015706 · DOI
  32. 10.1118/1.1748629 · DOI
  33. Pettaway C. A., 1996, Clin. Cancer Res., 2, 1627
  34. 10.1002/mrm.10418 · DOI
  35. 10.1148/radiol.2451061345 · DOI
  36. 10.1002/mrm.1910070104 · DOI
  37. 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-06-0676 · DOI
  38. 10.1021/ac60289a016 · DOI
  39. 10.1016/j.ab.2004.03.049 · DOI
  40. 10.1021/la701100r · DOI
  41. 10.1007/3-540-26523-6_3 · DOI
  42. 10.1021/es0518068 · DOI
  43. 10.1021/la063744k · DOI
  44. 10.1088/0957-4484/19/26/265102 · DOI
  45. 10.1007/s11051-011-0548-z · DOI
  46. 10.1103/PhysRevE.49.5319 · DOI
  47. 10.1063/1.3617251 · DOI
  48. 10.1103/PhysRevE.64.061401 · DOI
  49. 10.1007/s11051-011-0645-z · DOI
  50. 10.3109/02656739009141144 · DOI
  51. 10.1016/j.jmmm.2006.11.168 · DOI
  52. 10.1016/j.jmmm.2010.11.011 · DOI
  53. 10.1109/TMAG.2007.894127 · DOI
  54. 10.1088/1742-6596/187/1/012069 · DOI
  55. 10.1021/jp912076f · DOI
  56. 10.1109/TMAG.2012.2224328 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 115

Metadata

Authors
Etheridge, M. L., Hurley, K. R., Zhang, J., Jeon, S., Ring, H. L., Hogan, C., Haynes, C. L., Garwood, M., & Bischof, J. C.
Affiliations
  • Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Minnesota, 111 Church Street SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA
  • Department of Chemistry, University of Minnesota, 207 Pleasant Street SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA
  • Center for Magnetic Resonance Research, University of Minnesota, 2021 Sixth Street SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA
Venue
TECHNOLOGY
Published
2014-09
Volume
02
Issue
03
Pages
214-228
ISSN
  • 2339-5478
  • 2345-7740
Cited by
115
References
1
Language
en

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review